Stop the presses, thanks for the comedic break, I need all the laughs I can get these days. Well done, I insist on more of this lunacy, as soon as possible. You have a gift my friend, use it well!

tfhr, you outran me with a few lines and I worked dang hard on that piece, well done my friend. You are obviously well versed in military etiquette and I thank you for helping me get a point across. Its funny, I used 2500 years of history to make a point and you used a modern squad bay with the dynamics of typical situations written in a simple concise manner and made your point with the force of an overhand right. Well done sir!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by FloppingAces, FloppingAces. FloppingAces said: Is The American Military Ready For Greek Love? [Reader Post]: The love of one warrior for another has played an.. http://bit.ly/1NKwoc [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Mr. T:

Nobody wonders about the person that is saving their neck. It’s about the person or persons that put them out there where they ended up in need of saving.

Here is what I mean:

There are many rules on the books to discourage fraternization. Why do you suppose that would be necessary? Is there something bad about socializing between ranks? It would seem like that would build bonds that would enhance teamwork because everyone knows the limits and nobody would exploit those links or abuse them in any way, right? If you know people then you know that the notion that fraternization would have no harmful impact on morale or discipline is simply false.

Consider that senior personnel cannot loan money to subordinates, even for a purely innocent purpose. What harm would it do to make sure that your soldier’s family has enough money at the end of the month to keep some groceries in the fridge? None. But to the other soldiers that feel that they could also use a buck to make ends meet, this appears as favoritism if only one troop seems to get that extra support. Some personnel might feel some sort of obligation existed due to this financial transaction. It only gets worse from there but to get back to socializing between ranks, you have to be able to see that some feelings of favoritism will emerge if the First Sergeant is inviting some of his troops over for a poker game but not all of his troops. We don’t even have to get into the issue of taking money from troops if Top happens to get lucky with the cards.

These things are magnified beyond belief when the order comes down for your unit to conduct another risky operation when the Company Commander’s favorite Platoon Leader’s unit never seems to draw that short straw. If you think Joe doesn’t track that sort of thing you would be terribly remiss regarding the average soldier’s attentiveness to everything from duty rosters in garrison on down the line to the worst jobs on the battlefield.

Throw sex into that equation, mix in a population with a lot of different ideas about what is fair and what isn’t, and you have recipe for disaster. We do not allow heterosexual married couples in the same commands for that reason because even the appearance of favoritism or conflict of interest can cause irreparable damage to morale, unit cohesion, and may ultimately compromise the mission. The minute you have an outwardly homosexual leader in a unit there will be suspicions that he or she may play favorites because one soldier or sailor is his or her “type”, regardless if anything has actually happened or not. The suspicion might as well be an engagement ring because it will surely be a weight around the neck of everyone serving in that unit and the organizations that depend on that unit, whether they know the specifics or not.

There is a war on and social experimentation of this type is not going to help advance the fight effectively against those who would do us harm. To say that pursuing some resolution of the corrupt, political compromise called the “Don’t ask don’t tell” policy is a distraction seriously underestimates the damage that it has already done and of the greater damage that would result if the policy were to be further liberalized. Abusing the power of the Executive Branch and it’s unique status regarding the military to force an artificial “normalization” of homosexual lifestyles constitutes an end run around civilian society. Accepting homosexuality is a matter for individuals to consider on their own terms. If the President of the United States want to convince the American population that homosexuals are no different than anyone else then I say let him try his best. He cannot order the American public to change their views on this topic and I think this is the wrong time to order the military to instruct service members within it’s ranks to change theirs.

There is also the matter of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The President cannot change the UCMJ, that is the domain of the Legislative Branch and without Congress’ cooperation substantive changes are not possible. If the President thinks he’s having a hard time with his Blue Dogs now, just try and foist a radical rewrite of the UCMJ on them. He cannot afford that now, if ever, so don’t expect any immediate changes other than a few edits to be delivered from the teleprompter when support needs shoring up here and there.

One last note – If President Obama feels so strongly about the equality of homosexuals, then why didn’t he risk his candidacy by supporting marriage between same sex couples? Was it too dangerous to risk that shot at the Oval Office? Was winning the White House just so much more important? Well how about winning the war, for crying out loud?! Order, discipline and morale are critical elements for survival on the battlefield and they could be jeopardized by a risky proposition that already served it’s purpose as campaign fodder for Bill Clinton and created a nuisance for the military.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

CAUTION THE BELOW POST CONTAINS GRAPHIC AND DISTURBING IMAGES.

Obama gives speech before the nations larges all male gay rights group

Obama closes his speech with, ” I will end the don’t ask don’t tell military policy,which ah… proves that I want and have your backs.”
The all male crowd then erupted into wild applause and shouts of “we want your back too” as hundreds of motel key cards began to be thrown onto the stage. Loud bumping disco music then begins to fill the overhead speakers, as Obama breaks into a Robot dance.

AND THE GAY AGENDA PUSHES ON…..
Gay comic book superheros…..
Lesbian Batwoman Busts Comic Book Barriers.
“Batcave Woman”—described as a “community activists by day (who teaches 1st graders about diversity), a lesbian socialite by night and a crime-fighter by later in the night”—will star in a 12-issue run of “Detective Comics” being hailed as groundbreaking by gay organizations. The readers will get a hint of her lesbianism when it’s discovered that she only invites woman over to get a look at her Bat Cave. “Batcave Woman’s” motto will be “I’ll knockout any man and lick any woman who tries to fight me.”

AND…….

Comics Legend Stan Lee Creates Gay Superhero, “Homo Exceptional Man”

Look! What’s that flying just above the Gutters?
Homo Exceptional man don’t fly he flutters.
He’s not wearing a cape like the others.
He’s got a sweater tied around his shoulders.
Although,
his wife don’t know,
he’s on the down low.
He’s coming to make a stand,
for the gay man.
Gonna fight every damn,
Republican.
O Bam A! He’ll shout,
as he tries to scratch your eyes out.

AND DON’T FORGET THE CHILDRENS CARTOON SHOW………….
VIACOM: NEW CARTOON CHARACTER TO DISPUTE STAIN GLASS BOB FANCY PANTS

Viacom Inc. who produces the cartoon show Nickelodeon, will attempt to improve their subscriptions in the San Francisco area by introducing a new cartoon character named Stain Glass Bob Fancy Pants. The cartoon will follow Stain Glass Bob as he hits all the San Francisco area nightclubs showing off his fancy moves and fancy pants on the dance floor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Easy solution make all gay/lezzie units. So you get 3 genders but you get to test if gays can fight without having to worry about their bunk mates killing them.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

If a homosexual individual wanted to save my life on the battlefield, I do not think I would stop him.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Aleric, I think you miscounted, with trans-gender people you might need 6, I think. Although, I don’t fully understand the concept. How do you address a trans-gender officer. Is it sir mam or mam sir, this will require the military book of etiquette to be rewritten. These must be the new jobs Obama is talking about. Yipee!

Will you be able to make a formal complaint if a gay guy always showers when you do? If you drop your wallet in the squad bay, will you need to kick it all the way to your bunk before you bend over to pick it up? These are questions that need to be addressed.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Ban gays from military – period — the Sparta BS lasted one whole 20 years (source – histoire channel) — well duh!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The problem with this brings into being the need for seperate shower and toilets for the different genders, now instead of two, you will need four. The same goes for sleeping quarters and don’t even get me started on how they are suppose to handle spouses and dependants.

Like or Dislike: 0  0